Search Climate Insights Directory

A satellite analysis using TROPOMI data reveals that Australia's coal mine methane emissions are significantly under-reported. For the 2020 financial year, satellite estimates for six mining clusters—representing 79% of black coal production—were 40% higher than the national total reported by the National Greenhouse Accounts. The discrepancy is most pronounced in New South Wales, where fugitive emissions were found to be approximately twice as high as official reports in both 2020 and 2021. The report attributes some of this variability to the adoption of 'Method 2', a site-specific company-led estimation approach for open-cut mines that often results in lower reported emissions compared to state-based averages (Method 1).

The Consumption Compass 2.0 uses a hybrid scaling approach to downscale national consumption-based emissions data to Demographic Statistical Areas (DeSO) in Sweden. It integrates diverse datasets, including Mosaic lifestyle profiles, household budget surveys, and energy consumption data, to provide local-level insights. The tool also includes a scenario function for municipalities to model the impact of consumption shifts in transport, energy, food, and goods through 2050, accounting for rebound emissions.

The statement argues that large-scale forest biomass energy is not carbon neutral and actively harms the climate, biodiversity, and human rights. It claims that current carbon accounting erroneously labels biomass as zero-emission, which masks the actual greenhouse gas releases and encourages deforestation. The document further asserts that biomass energy extends the lifespan of coal plants and diverts investment from truly low-emission renewables like wind and solar. It calls on governments and financial institutions to stop the expansion of the biomass industry and eliminate related subsidies in favor of forest restoration.

The document examines the systemic failures of carbon offsetting, highlighting that most credits—particularly those for forestry and renewable energy—lack additionality and environmental integrity. It argues that offsetting often leads to an overall increase in emissions by delaying necessary mitigation and allowing continued investment in high-emitting technologies. The briefing concludes that carbon avoidance and reduction offsets have no place in ambitious climate policies, recommending that priority be given to direct emissions cuts and non-market-based climate finance.

The study tests the IPCC's carbon accounting methods for soil organic carbon (SOC) in the Argentinean Pampa Region, finding that a developed Tier 2 (T2) method using the RothC model significantly outperforms the Tier 1 (T1) method. While T1 showed poor performance at both sub-region and county scales, the T2 method demonstrated strong accuracy at the sub-region scale (R2 = 0.85) and improved accuracy at the county scale (R2 = 0.73) when excluding the Flooding Pampa region. The T2 method identified the highest average SOC losses in Central Pampa (35%), Southern Pampa – Eastern (28%), and Rolling Pampa (26%).

CBRE is implementing a multi-step engagement strategy to tackle Scope 3 emissions, which are over 50 times greater than its direct operational emissions. By identifying a core group of 7,500 suppliers responsible for 90% of its purchased goods and services emissions, the firm provides tailored support, including a free emissions calculation platform via Emitwise, to help small and medium-sized enterprises report data. While only 16% of engaged suppliers have provided all requested information, the company is improving response rates by integrating climate reporting into its Partner Excellence Program and translating resources into multiple languages.

The IISD response to the DESNZ consultation argues for more rigorous standards in assessing Scope 3 emissions for offshore oil projects, specifically calling for the separate reporting of Category 11 emissions, the use of zero-emission baselines, and the assessment of significance based on 1.5°C science-based scenarios rather than as a proportion of global emissions.

The report finds that the dairy and coffee sectors are failing to address methane emissions, with 18 out of 20 analyzed companies scoring less than 50% on a comprehensive performance scale. While some companies acknowledge the climate impact of methane, there is a widespread reluctance to reduce dairy production, and most lack specific methane targets or transparent reporting practices.

The WWF-US FY2024 Corporate Partnerships Report outlines a strategic framework for engaging businesses to achieve nature-positive and net-zero outcomes. The organization categorizes its corporate work into four primary approaches: transforming business operations, consumer and employee engagement, shared policy and advocacy, and financing climate and nature projects. In FY24, income from these partnerships accounted for 9% of the WWF-US office's total income. The report lists numerous high-value partnerships across sectors such as ICT, retail, and food, with significant investments in nature-based solutions, plastic waste reduction via the ReSource hub, and forest stewardship through the Forests Forward program.

Carbon Market Watch condemns FIFA's hosting decisions for the 2030 and 2034 World Cups, asserting that the events will cause severe environmental damage. The organization highlights the failure of the 2022 Qatar World Cup's carbon neutrality claims and warns that the 2030 tournament's multi-continental structure and Saudi Arabia's 2034 bid—which includes building 11 new stadiums—will lead to massive emissions from construction and air travel. The statement also links these decisions to the influence of polluting corporate sponsors like Aramco and raises concerns over migrant worker deaths in host nations.

Global Energy Monitor (GEM) identifies that five major oil and gas plant owners failed to disclose 10.7 million tonnes of CO2 emissions in 2022, resulting in an annual social cost of $2 billion. The report highlights how companies use the 'operational control' and 'financial control' approaches of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol to exclude assets from their reporting boundaries. Specifically, the Saudi Electricity Company failed to disclose over 7 million tonnes of CO2 from three plants, representing $1.3 billion in annual climate costs. Other analyzed entities, including Egyptian Electricity Holding Company, Calpine Corporation, Chubu Electric Power Co. Inc., and Entergy Corporation, also exhibited gaps between their reported emissions and their actual asset ownership.

The document examines how discrepancies between NDC accounting and IPCC standards lead to an overestimation of land-based carbon sequestration, potentially reducing the global carbon budget by 15-18%. It highlights that current NDC pledges for land-based removal involve approximately 1 billion hectares, which the author claims is impossible without threatening food security and biodiversity. Furthermore, the briefing critiques IPCC Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) for ignoring land tenure, human rights, and the declining ability of natural sinks to store carbon under rising temperatures, suggesting that sustainable removal potential is up to 79% lower than IPCC estimates.

The document defines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as the physical extraction and permanent storage of atmospheric CO2. It argues that CDR must supplement, not substitute, deep emission reductions of over 90%. The handbook evaluates six negative emissions technologies and practices (NETPs)—biochar, BioCCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering, afforestation/reforestation, and soil carbon sequestration—detailing their technical readiness, permanence, and environmental trade-offs. It emphasizes the need for robust 'cradle-to-grave' carbon accounting, separate targets for reductions and removals to avoid mitigation deterrence, and the integration of the Planetary Boundaries framework to ensure Earth system stability. The text also critiques current EU legislation, such as the Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF) and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), for lacking ambition and failing to distinguish between permanent and temporary storage.

The document defines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as the physical extraction of CO2 from the atmosphere and its permanent storage. It argues that CDR must be a complement to, not a substitute for, aggressive emission reductions (over 90%). The guide evaluates six negative emissions technologies and practices (NETPs)—including Bio-CCS, DACCS, and biochar—while critiquing current EU policies for failing to distinguish between permanent removals and temporary biological sequestration. It advocates for a diversified portfolio of CDR methods, rigorous life-cycle accounting, and a governance framework based on the 'planetary boundaries' to avoid ecological trade-offs.

The report analyzes the environmental impact of the global data-center boom, identifying systemic challenges such as energy infrastructure lags and temporal-spatial mismatches between green power and demand. It proposes a comprehensive transformation pathway involving optimized site selection, enhanced energy efficiency through new metrics beyond PUE, and the adoption of diverse green power procurement options. The document emphasizes the potential for data centers to act as flexible grid resources and calls for mandatory carbon disclosure and standardized accounting to drive the transition.

The guide argues that US states are uniquely positioned to scale the carbon dioxide removal (CDR) industry by leveraging their specific geographies and regulatory authority. It outlines a framework for state leadership based on four core pillars: adopting approach-neutral and performance-based definitions of CDR, setting explicit removal targets aligned with carbon budgets, creating clear regulatory and permitting environments, and ensuring community-supported deployment through transparency and equity. The document emphasizes that CDR should complement, not replace, aggressive emissions reductions to avoid moral hazard.

The document examines the potential role of commodity-specific environmental attribute certificates (commodity EACs) as market-based instruments for corporate climate action, specifically in the context of upcoming revisions to the Science-Based Targets initiative’s Corporate Net Zero Standard and the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and Scope 3 Guidance. It argues that there is no universal approach to commodity EACs due to significant fragmentation in their definition and availability, and questions whether such instruments support sector transitions or potentially delay direct action.

The report argues that China's agri-food system requires significant investment to achieve net-zero emissions and climate resilience, but currently faces a massive funding gap and a mismatch between existing green finance policies and the sector's needs. It advocates for the use of transition finance—including sustainability-linked loans, bonds, and blended finance—to mobilize private capital. The authors emphasize that a 'just transition' is essential to protect vulnerable smallholder farmers. Key barriers identified include poor climate information disclosure by companies and a lack of credible transition plans. The report recommends that regulators standardize GHG accounting for agriculture, mandate climate disclosures for large firms, and align agricultural subsidies with climate goals.

The guide establishes 'Common Principles' for tracking green finance, emphasizing conservativeness and granularity. It details a three-step qualification process for adaptation finance and a whitelist-based approach for mitigation. It also introduces a methodology for biodiversity finance based on OECD Rio Markers and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, while addressing challenges like taxonomy misalignment and resource limitations within development finance institutions.

The guide establishes a standardized framework for tracking climate mitigation, adaptation, and biodiversity finance. It provides detailed lists of eligible activities for mitigation, a three-step validation process for adaptation, and specific criteria for biodiversity finance. The document emphasizes the use of ex-ante GHG emission reduction assessments and offers methodologies for quantifying finance through incremental or proportional approaches to ensure transparency and avoid double-counting.